Y'all know there were Republicans before 2017, right? ... 🤓 We have always been : The Anti Big Government, Pro people party. We still live there.

In the year 2000, my husband and I lived in Southern California. We went to the mall and saw for the first time a very large flatscreen TV. It was incredible. It was also $10,000. What has happened since then? Well, the government didn't decide that everyone had to right to high-tech media, and the government didn't inject cash subsidies into the television market. Technology advanced, production became cheaper... and now anyone can buy and enjoy that same TV for $250. I know, I know, that's a really small and silly example of market pressure and possibility-- but it is relatable across many sectors. Granted, some markets (like healthcare) absolutely do require regulatory oversight and last-resort safety nets for consumers-- but that is not the same as becoming entirely dependent upon Gov subsidies for sustainability. Seems to me that the ACA went beyond the consumer safety net, expanded access, last resort payer model-- and became the scaffolding underneath the system. The scaffolding is shoddy, folks; it was built poorly. Thats where we are. Healthcare needs an overhaul. Mark my words it's going one of two ways: It's either going full-blown socialized.... and you're not gonna like that outcome one bit. OR, it's going to become a Wall Street product, owned and operated by big corporations. (Or big "NGOs"). It's not too late for a correction. But I don't think folks are ready for the transition and return. Some consumer cash pay, less insurance dependency (catostrophic coverage models), insurance that functions like homeowners or auto. Broadening support for HSAs that roll over into long term life time savings accounts for illness and old age. Singapore is thriving on these concepts-- we have a blueprint and don't need to reinvent the wheel-- we can scale instead. So. Pick your treatment option: The ACA is literally on life-support. We need leaders are going to take up this challenge-- not bandage it, but operate on it STAT.

I've been banging the drum on healthcare for several years now trying to wake others up. I warned against the tide of concierge and the threat of docs leaving. Nothing feels worse than being unheard, and then being correct. At this point, the dam I warned would break... is broken. In my opinion, this is the number one issue facing the state and it will take brave, difficult, reform, not duct tape!!

Watch video. Republicans will be angry. Far far Lefties will swoon. Mids will mid. Diplomacy prevails, I'll say this: Sabina is a truly lovely person. I genuinely like her. She is warm and sweet and soft. No one can say that she does not wear her singular, keenly focused ideals openly. Her specific anti DC views resonate deeply with many urban core voters. Frankly, I understand the lane. BUT : Will it be enough to sway regular, everyday Rhode Islanders who are concerned with: Pension reform, healthcare, children's education, Social Security, infrastructure, roads, the state budget, safety issues, taxation, high energy costs, business, wages, workforce and union protections, inflation, city mandated cost concerns, housing, and a hundred-hundred other fundamental meaningful aspects of the struggling middle class working RI'ers literal day-to-day living worries and concerns? Her message speaks to none of that... and that worries me. I am further concerned with her alliance to rising DSA presence in Providence; a very bold and decisive stance to take. LT GOV race is very tight. We have specific and narrowly, singularly focused messaging from her camp and far broader encompassing and inclusive messaging from John Loughlin's camp. SO: What Cheer, Netop? The polls will show on 11/3. .

Excellent. Pls read. My prediction: this will pass and it will go to the courts. There is no way to do this cleanly, MP points this out very clearly.

Pls weigh in: I wonder if any care to comment on this thought/idea. What if ratepayers could settle their overdue accounts w RI energy for only the amount due for service and supply, being allowed to let the mandated green energy fees accumulate or go into an alternative payment plan ? Or, if an account falls into arrears, no shut off is allowed provided the base energy is paid for? I know it's an imperfect solution that might discourage people from paying the fees at all-- however, the fees are really at the behest of the state and not the energy company, so this is something we could examine, perhaps. I will try to follow up on this with experts and see if it is plausible or impossible as a solution-- but because it just literally occurred to me (1030 on a Tuesday) I'm throwing it out there for feedback and discussion. Keep it thoughtful, not incendiary.

• The tree will vote for the ax if the ax promises it will only cut down the tallest trees. • The tree will vote for the ax if the ax tells it the forest is the problem. • The tree will vote for the ax if the ax offers it a job swinging the blade. • Yet the tree won’t vote for the planter, because it’s been told the planter is the "real" threat. And basically, that's where we are politically.

"But Trump" Meanwhile, RI decoupled from no tax on tips and the generous fed tax scholarship savings... Can we just focus on our state for a change without blaming the DC boogeyman for every bad decision we have brought on ourselves?! Read the post.

I can only parse this as RO- DIE. What the what. Implies that Dems love the millionaires tax and the ACA. Plenty of Dems beg to differ. Is this only for the TiKTok voters?